Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: 2009 displays of the F-22 and the Rafale
Bluewings12    6/24/2009 5:03:48 PM
Let 's watch them first :-) The F-22 h*tp://www.air-attack.com/videos/single/cAhL7lJCk4I The Rafale : h*tp://www.dailymotion.com/user/ministeredeladefense/video/x9ma8h_demonstration-du-rafale_news Both aircrafts are pulling nice stuff . Rafale only does it twice faster . Explaination and details to follow . Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Herald12345    Baffle with bull II.   7/29/2009 10:16:36 AM

Wings and Configurations for High-Speed Flight

Swept Wings

The critical Mach number of a wing is the flight Mach number of the aircraft at which the local Mach number at some point of the wing becomes 1.0. At a Mach number slightly in excess of this critical value, shock waves form on the wing, and further increases in speed cause [249] large changes in the forces, moments, and pressures on the wing. The effects on the lift and drag characteristics of increasing the Mach number beyond the critical value are briefly discussed and illustrated in chapter 5. Subsonic aircraft usually do not cruise at Mach numbers much beyond the critical value. For supersonic flight, however, the aircraft must have sufficient power to overcome the high drag in the transonic speed range and be capable of controlled flight through this capricious Mach number range.

 

Mach angle    (NASA SP-7, 1965)
 

The angle between a Mach line and the direction of movement of undisturbed flow. See Mach wave.


Mach wave    (NASA SP-7, 1965)

1. A shock wave theoretically occurring along a common line of intersection of all the pressure disturbances emanating from an infinitesimally small particle moving at supersonic speed through a fluid medium, with such a wave considered to exert no changes in the condition of the fluid passing through it.

The concept of the Mach wave is used in defining and studying the realm of certain disturbances in a supersonic field of flow.

2. A very weak shock wave appearing, e.g., at the nose of a very sharp body, where the fluid undergoes no substantial change in direction.

link wave

Quote: in the mainly turn oriented energy regime, (underpowered engine you forgot to quote, H.)

Quote: Exactly what I said, poster, but without the uncited and unacknowledged fluff from ypir plagiarozed source . Who doesn't know aeronautics here?


  YOU.

  And it SHOWS, "unacknowledged fluff from your plagiarozed source?.
  NASA/DRYDEN defines the aerodynamics of F-22 and F-35, they WRITE the book in PLAIN American English but obviously your bunch is NOT interested the slightest...
 
Actually LOCKHEED defined the aeridynamics of the F-22, you ignorant poster, ypu. What generalized mush you quoted has no bearing on this specific point I covered.  

   Time to go to your nearest flying school and borrow the books, in aeronautic language this phrases means nothing else than "i dont know what i am writing" but i SURE can flame...

 Quote: Since I don't have to hunt for this stuff...

  You should LEARN because you cant even comprehend what you copy/paste...

  I cited what I needed to repeat what I said ahead of it.

Quote: And for a novice like you: wiki is good enough.

  AGAIN you are the novices here...

  The sources i am using are the only authorities on the subject, meaning before puting even a begginer on an aircraft youy have to learn your theoprical basics, it helps understanding the complex stuff which is way above your newbbies heads.

Meaning that when you are caught, as usual with people like you, drowning in a discussion with someone who knows far more than they do., you resort to rhetoric, cite some BS not even relevant to the point, and hope that your BULL will obscure your ignorance on subject. You didnb't even understand what angle of incidence was and then you LIED about it.

  And BTW the best example of it is your quest for the Delta wing  when the best sources available simply talk about wing sweep.

The point of wht the delta was chosen for its stall characteristics om high angle of attack was lost on you wasn't it?

  There is no need for a delta design to obtain a high Critical Mach.

In a steep turn there is, you ignorant poster.  <
 
Quote    Reply

growler       7/29/2009 10:19:14 AM
The Rafale never had such problem...
 
Unsurprising, since the Rafale has no stealth coating.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Baffle with bull II.   7/29/2009 10:22:57 AM
General class characteristic of deltas
Quote: Another advantage is that as the angle of attack increases the leading edge of the wing generates a vortex which remains attached to the upper surface of the wing, giving the delta a very high stall angle.

 

  Yet another CLEAR case of "I don't know what i write about" and mediocre copy/paste while insulting people calling them liars and failing to comprehend what one posts...

 

  Vortex lift is a characteristic of the DELTA wing little to do with the choice of sweep angle for Rafale.



  F-22 generates vortex lift as well as that of Typhoon, Gripen, Mirage 2000 , Concorde and yet their sweep angles are total different...

 

 

This just shows that you don't understand what was said or why I chose it. It says exactly what I said it says. The lesding edge of the wingplan form determines at what delay the shockj tibe drag exerts maximum effect on the aurframe. The steeper the sweepo the further aft of the aeroshell the "stick" of the shock tibes exerts effect. this incidentally chanhes with overall velocuty and is directlu proprtionate to that velocity.
 
Did I already tell you that you don't know what the hell you discuss?
 
Herald
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       7/29/2009 10:34:31 AM
Growler :
""Unsurprising, since the Rafale has no stealth coating.""
 
??? Are you another misinformed person ?
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Baffle with bull II.   7/29/2009 10:38:28 AM

It seems that the F-22 's RAM coating is having even more problems than I thought ...

(July 3 , 2009)


 

""A former LockMart engineer who worked on the F-117, B-2 & F-22 programs is to file a lawsuit against the company for allegedly conceiling deficiencies on the radar-absorbent material (RAM) coatings of the stealth fighter:

The pending lawsuit accuses Lockheed of knowingly providing defective coatings used to reduce the aircraft?s radar and visual signatures, and covering up the problem by adding 272kg (600lbs) worth of extra layers.

 

The F-22 requires three layers of coatings to reduce its radar signature, according to Olsen?s statements in his case. A primer seals the surface of the aircraft skin and helps with the adhesion of the next layer. Next, a conductive coating with silver flakes mixed with polyurethane materials is applied to keep radar waves from bouncing back to the emitter source. Finally, a topcoat layer has properties, including metallic materials, to reduce heat, which lowers the risk of radar detection. "If those coatings are not effective, the other stealth measures of the aircraft?s design are negated," the lawsuit says.

Olsen claims he witnessed Lockheed management misleading USAF officials about the quality of the stealth coatings. Olsen?s supervisors instructed him not to speak at meetings with USAF officials. [?] Lockheed also schemed to avoid government inspections of the coatings, secretly shipping batches of the stealth materials to the homes, the lawsuit states.""

*************


 The Rafale never had such problem ...


 

Cheers .


 
Source.

Again with the bull?
 
Let me quote from source:
 
Another put out man? Looking at Raptors being serviced at Elmendorf under snow, washed with water with technicians walking on the wings makes me think that guy stuck in late 90s with his technology level claims.
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       7/29/2009 10:45:22 AM
Give up Herald , you do NOT know what you are talking about ...
 
Your stupidity is only matched by your bias , clown .
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Bull VI   7/29/2009 11:12:31 AM

Give up Herald , you do NOT know what you are talking about ...

 

Your stupidity is only matched by your bias , clown .

 

Cheers .



When I reduce a poster to this, I know I caught him in another false representation, and cited his own source against him to prove it. What's the matter, truck driver? Even with your brigade of fellow travelers you imported to pollute the forum with your collective fantasies, you can't handle the TRUTH? Three ignorant posters like you trio of fantasists, are still three ignorant posters, no matter how many misrepresentations  and desperate alibis for the defective Rafale, the three of you post.
 
Herald 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Wingman       7/29/2009 11:23:48 AM

Quote: This just shows that you don't understand what was said or why I chose it.

 You did not know what you wre writing dont try to make up you did, the choice of sweep angle had nothing to do with what you said.

  >but was actually a designer compromise for angle of attack (lift versus drag) in the mainly turn oriented energy regime,<

  This is what you said it means absolutly NOTHING and certainly not what you say not it did.

 

Quote:  It says exactly what I said it says. The lesding edge of the wingplan form determines at what delay the shockj tibe drag exerts maximum effect on the aurframe.

  Please learn your basics and stop trying to imply you said something you did not.

 

 Blah-di-blah begginers stuff which basicaly doesnt MEAN anything...

  Back to newbies school for you Herald


Quote:  When I reduce a poster to this, I know I caught him in another false representation, and cited his own source against him to prove it.

  You made a fool of yourself and opnly have yourself to blame you reduced no one but yourself...
 
 
Quote:  you can't handle the TRUTH?
 
  AGAIN dont take your case for a general rule, ignorance isn't my forte but apparently it is yours...
 
 
Quote: Three ignorant posters like you trio of fantasists, are still three ignorant posters, no matter how many misrepresentations  and desperate alibis for the defective Rafale, the three of you post.

  AGAIN dont take your case for a general rule, ignorance isn't my forte but apparently it is yours...

 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Bull VII.   7/29/2009 11:57:30 AM

Quote: This just shows that you don't understand what was said or why I chose it.


 You did not know what you wre writing dont try to make up you did, the choice of sweep angle had nothing to do with what you said.

Lie. Go back and read it again.

  >but was actually a designer compromise for angle of attack (lift versus drag) in the mainly turn oriented energy regime,<

  This is what you said it means absolutly NOTHING and certainly not what you say not it did.

It means exactly what I said and the fact that you do not understand it proves you haven't got a clue as to what we discuss.

Quote:  It says exactly what I said it says. The lesding edge of the wingplan form determines at what delay the shock tube drag exerts maximum effect on the airframe.

  Please learn your basics and stop trying to imply you said something you did not.

Its plain English. Obviously you are trying desperately to establish some credibility by trying to say "tain't so". Problem is that simple denial now that you been caught in multiple errors and lies doesn't substitute for KNOWLEDGE in subject.

 Blah-di-blah begginers stuff which basicaly doesnt MEAN anything...

What is a shock tube? Do you even know the term?

  Back to newbies school for you Herald

And you are still a liar.  Want to play games with a fellow six year old? I have a couple of ignoant oines here who are your speed.

Quote:  When I reduce a poster to this, I know I caught him in another false representation, and cited his own source against him to prove it.

  You made a fool of yourself and opnly have yourself to blame you reduced no one but yourself...

Rhetorical trick. Meaningless noise. Al,l I see here is a 1%er reduced to name calling when he has no argument. When I learned the art of FRENCH DEBATE, it was not just to demean the person wiuth the standard insult , but to really cut him up by showing the world what a fool he was by destroying him wiuth FACTS  

Quote:  you can't handle the TRUTH?

  AGAIN dont take your case for a general rule, ignorance isn't my forte but apparently it is yours...

Apparently, you missed the rest of it when I correctly lumped you in with the other two. You are part of a class set of fantasists.  

Quote: Three ignorant posters like you trio of fantasists, are still three ignorant posters, no matter how many misrepresentations  anddesperate alibis for the defective Rafale, the three of you post.

  AGAIN dont take your case for a general rule, ignorance isn't my forte but apparently it is yours...

The general proof is the three of you  mutually reinforce each other's stupidity and lies  ON CUE. Just how naive do you think the rest of us really are? You are a disgrace to FRANCE. Frenchmen generally are better educated and more HONEST than you.

 
Quote    Reply

Wingman       7/29/2009 12:13:00 PM

 

Quote: Lie. Go back and read it again.

  Done time and time again, being in a state of denial doesn't make you an educated person in a field you didn't study and dont start to comprehend the basics of.


Quote: It means exactly what I said and the fact that you do not understand it proves you haven't got a clue as to what we discuss.

  It means exactly NOTHING according to aerodynamic languages and known rules, you are an ignorant trying to make up that you know something which visibly is way above your knowlege base.


Quote: Its plain English. Obviously you are trying desperately to establish some credibility by trying to say "tain't so". Problem is that simple denial now that you been caught in multiple errors and lies doesn't substitute for KNOWLEDGE in subject."

  I DONT need to establish credibility, as opposed to YOU, i know my basics and a lot more advanced stuff which you dont even understand to the point of mystaking everything.

 
Quote: What is a shock tube? Do you even know the term?

  All you wrote would have a begginer glider pilots weting his pants laughing, you speak aerodynamic like a green mokey speaks Chinese and you know as much about it as the same green monkey could learn about quantum mechanics.

  = Back to newbies school for you Herald


Quote:  And you are still a liar.  Want to play games with a fellow six year old? I have a couple of ignoant oines here who are your speed.

  Insulting people is all you got you can't make your case, you dont have what it takes, so be it, you wont be lookinsg smarter only more of what you really are, an ignorant flamer.


Quote:  Rhetorical trick. Meaningless noise. but to really cut him up by showing the world what a fool he was by destroying him wiuth FACTS

  FACTS ARE: You dont know the subject the slightest and ressort to insults and reverse psychology, you are in great need of people attantion and even more of education.  

 

Quote: Apparently, you missed the rest of it when I correctly lumped you in with the other two. You are part of a class set of fantasists.

  BOY the only fantasist is you, when i speak about the subject to a pilot or an aerodynamicist we understand each other, he would advise you to look at NASA's begginer's topics just as i did.  

 

Quote: The general proof is the three of you  mutually reinforce each other's stupidity and lies  ON CUE..... Frenchmen generally are better educated and more HONEST than you.

  Frenchmen ARE perhaps more educated and honnest than YOU for sure!
 
 AGAIN you know zilth about the subject, and it SHOWS don't blame other for your own ignorance.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics